If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Obama administration weighing targeted drone strike on unnamed American citizen in unknown country doing unrevealed things   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 404
    More: Scary, American citizens, Obama, Americans, United States, Obama administration, Gadahn, Anwar al-Awlaki, risk aversion  
•       •       •

5060 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Feb 2014 at 7:00 AM (44 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



404 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-11 12:25:56 AM  
al-Qaeda terrorist! why didn't we think of this before?

static-secure.guim.co.uk
 
2014-02-11 12:29:54 AM  
If you're located within the borders of the US you're entitled to due process of law.  If you're operating as part of a terrorist network overseas, it shouldn't matter if you're a citizen of the US, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the same rules don't apply over there as they do here.
 
2014-02-11 12:59:34 AM  
Everything a soldier does when he's fighting is criminal. Soldiers are the worst criminals in the world. That's why it's legal to shoot them ON SIGHT.

It happens that the terrorist soldiers can't see as far as the American ones. Them's the breaks. If you don't like the rules, you can always refrain from joining the game.
 
2014-02-11 01:16:33 AM  
Anyone remember when the GOP was stepping all over each other to say that the terrorists would be "laughing in the streets" if we elected a pacifist Democrat named Barack Obama?
 
2014-02-11 01:29:02 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: If you're located within the borders of the US you're entitled to due process of law.  If you're operating as part of a terrorist network overseas, it shouldn't matter if you're a citizen of the US, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the same rules don't apply over there as they do here.


Glenn Beck would disagree.

/so long as a Democrat is in office
 
2014-02-11 02:31:19 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: If you're located within the borders of the US you're entitled to due process of law.  If you're operating as part of a terrorist network overseas, it shouldn't matter if you're a citizen of the US, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the same rules don't apply over there as they do here.


The Fifth Amendment says:
"...nor shall any person... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment says:
"...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

 Ummm... that's not what the Constitution says.
 
2014-02-11 03:03:12 AM  
And it just so happens that Ted Cruz is currently traveling overseas. Coincidence?
 
2014-02-11 06:19:05 AM  
Does his name rhyme with snowmen?
 
2014-02-11 07:03:09 AM  

propasaurus: And it just so happens that Ted Cruz is currently traveling overseas. Coincidence?


The article said it was an American, not a Canadian.
 
2014-02-11 07:05:45 AM  
Can we follow the whole thing on Twitter?
 
2014-02-11 07:08:12 AM  
I do find it amusing that as far as some Americans are concerned, the President could drone strike 8 billion people, just as long as none of them are peripherally connected to the US in their past and therefore might technically be a citizen, which would obviously be an outrage of horrendous proportions.
 
2014-02-11 07:08:30 AM  
I don't consider it any more or less ok to kill someone on the basis of citizenship.
 
2014-02-11 07:09:28 AM  
An American operating overseas with a foreign military organization that is hostile to America or operating with a terrorist organization?  I am OK with Drone Striking them into oblivion.
 
2014-02-11 07:10:27 AM  
Would a targeted high-yield nuke strike make everyone feel better?
 
2014-02-11 07:12:26 AM  

Mock26: An American operating overseas with a foreign military organization that is hostile to America or operating with a terrorist organization?  I am OK with Drone Striking them into oblivion.

Accused

of.
 
2014-02-11 07:13:31 AM  

DrPainMD: TuteTibiImperes: If you're located within the borders of the US you're entitled to due process of law.  If you're operating as part of a terrorist network overseas, it shouldn't matter if you're a citizen of the US, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the same rules don't apply over there as they do here.

The Fifth Amendment says:
"...nor shall any person... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment says:
"...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

 Ummm... that's not what the Constitution says.


Stop with the racist diatribe.
 
2014-02-11 07:13:42 AM  
But, but we should BRING THEM BACK FOR TRIAL!

Think through the logistics for just a moment...
 
2014-02-11 07:13:57 AM  
FTA: But Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, alluded to the case last week during a public hearing on security threats, accusing the administration of adopting cumbersome counterterrorism policies that have made Americans more vulnerable to attack.

Oh, now I see who the open source was and what this article is really about.

They're playing Whack-An-Obama.

www.sadlyno.com
 
2014-02-11 07:16:28 AM  
Wait a sec. About a decade ago, I remember folks saying that anyone who is actively working with terrorist organizations is an enemy combatant and should be treated as such.

Wonder what changed. Hmmm.
 
2014-02-11 07:17:54 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: If you're located within the borders of the US you're entitled to due process of law.  If you're operating as part of a terrorist network overseas, it shouldn't matter if you're a citizen of the US, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the same rules don't apply over there as they do here.


Who gets to determine that is accurate instead of a bald accusation with no proof?
 
2014-02-11 07:19:13 AM  

Mock26: An American operating overseas with a foreign military organization that is hostile to America or operating with a terrorist organization?  I am OK with Drone Striking them into oblivion.


Americans of German descent that had gone to Germany to fight with the Nazis were often executed as soon as they were identified. Italians who were with the American Army were used as translators, which is obvious, but they were welcomed with enthusiasm by Italian villagers as long lost relatives. I heard one story about an Italian-American Soldier entering a village with his company and being called to translate with some village elders, discovered one of them was his grandfather.

And dammit, I can't find that story anywhere.
 
2014-02-11 07:19:26 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: If you're located within the borders of the US you're entitled to due process of law.  If you're operating as part of a terrorist network overseas, it shouldn't matter if you're a citizen of the US, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the same rules don't apply over there as they do here.


In addition to due process, what other rights do American citizens surrender when they travel abroad?
 
2014-02-11 07:19:30 AM  

Turbo Cojones: But, but we should BRING THEM BACK FOR TRIAL!

Think through the logistics for just a moment...



Problem is, a lot of these guys have made it abundantly clear that they will not be arrested.
Just overnight, there was a report of 20 Iraqi insurgients who were killed during an accident while training to be car bombers.

Some of these people actually go to CLASS to figure out how to kill themselves and take a lot of people with them.
 
2014-02-11 07:19:35 AM  

DrPainMD: TuteTibiImperes: If you're located within the borders of the US you're entitled to due process of law.  If you're operating as part of a terrorist network overseas, it shouldn't matter if you're a citizen of the US, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the same rules don't apply over there as they do here.

The Fifth Amendment says:
"...nor shall any person... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment says:
"...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

 Ummm... that's not what the Constitution says.


Is it a violation when the police shoot a suspect without trial?
 
2014-02-11 07:20:24 AM  

DrPainMD: TuteTibiImperes: If you're located within the borders of the US you're entitled to due process of law.  If you're operating as part of a terrorist network overseas, it shouldn't matter if you're a citizen of the US, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the same rules don't apply over there as they do here.

The Fifth Amendment says:
"...nor shall any person... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment says:
"...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

 Ummm... that's not what the Constitution says.


It actually does. What do you think "due process of law" means, anyway? It's never so simple as a one line quote. What the president is doing is within the powers of his office, powers that were allocated by the constitution and by various acts of congress over the centuries. The war powers of the president should be more limited,I agree. However, the "due process" doesn't have to be a court, by law. It could be any "due process" as interpreted by the POTUS and SCOTUS, and thus far, it's been deemed appropriate to use intelligence agencies to locate and eliminate any person duly determined to be at war with America or our allies.

TLDR: The due process is the president getting together with the intelligence agencies, looking over the evidence, and determining if another human should die on the other side of the world, all within the law.
 
2014-02-11 07:21:40 AM  
We get it, he's black.
 
2014-02-11 07:23:16 AM  

irate vegetable: Is it a violation when the police shoot a suspect without trial?


The police coordinate raids with the intention of executing suspects?
 
2014-02-11 07:24:11 AM  

lohphat: Who gets to determine that is accurate instead of a bald accusation with no proof?


You do, when you decide to move to Yemen and live in an al Qaeda cell.
What, do you think the military would just start targeting American tourists in foreign countries for the hell of it?
 
2014-02-11 07:25:21 AM  

GoldSpider: irate vegetable: Is it a violation when the police shoot a suspect without trial?

The police coordinate raids with the intention of executing suspects?


and their dogs too judging by how often it happens.
 
2014-02-11 07:25:29 AM  
We can't trust our government to feed poor people but we can trust it to kill citizens based on secret information.
 
2014-02-11 07:26:27 AM  

GoldSpider: irate vegetable: Is it a violation when the police shoot a suspect without trial?

The police coordinate raids with the intention of executing suspects?


Ask Rodney King.
 
2014-02-11 07:27:19 AM  

GoldSpider: irate vegetable: Is it a violation when the police shoot a suspect without trial?

The police coordinate raids with the intention of executing suspects?


sometimes...
 
2014-02-11 07:28:46 AM  

stoli n coke: Wait a sec. About a decade ago, I remember folks saying that anyone who is actively working with terrorist organizations is an enemy combatant and should be treated as such.

Wonder what changed. Hmmm.


The left started to agree with the right.
This simply means the president can write, judge, and execute the law as he sees fit.

/Its what we elected him to do.
 
2014-02-11 07:29:08 AM  
"That's the good thing about being president.  I can do whatever I want." - Obama

Funny I should hear him say that just as I was reading this thread.

/yes, he actually said that.
//no, he was not referring to the subject of this thread.
 
2014-02-11 07:29:30 AM  

ReverendJasen: lohphat: Who gets to determine that is accurate instead of a bald accusation with no proof?

You do, when you decide to move to Yemen and live in an al Qaeda cell.
What, do you think the military would just start targeting American tourists in foreign countries for the hell of it?


I have a former colleague who was working inYemen before the bottom fell out for an oil company.

All it takes in Afghanistan is some warlord to make a statement, no matter if it's true or not, that so and so "is a terrorist" to have them disappeared to Gitmo.

Yes. That's all it takes to have your freedom taken from you. A single bald accusation.

And yes. I have a problem with that.
 
2014-02-11 07:29:49 AM  

irate vegetable: and their dogs too judging by how often it happens.


That's just for fun.

lohphat: Ask Rodney King.


wut?
 
2014-02-11 07:30:54 AM  

lohphat: Ask Rodney King.


Dorner, anyone?  That was an unabashed, unapologetic assassination.  There were never any orders to capture him, it was "shoot to kill."
 
2014-02-11 07:30:56 AM  

lohphat: ReverendJasen: lohphat: Who gets to determine that is accurate instead of a bald accusation with no proof?

You do, when you decide to move to Yemen and live in an al Qaeda cell.
What, do you think the military would just start targeting American tourists in foreign countries for the hell of it?

I have a former colleague who was working inYemen before the bottom fell out for an oil company.

All it takes in Afghanistan is some warlord to make a statement, no matter if it's true or not, that so and so "is a terrorist" to have them disappeared to Gitmo.

Yes. That's all it takes to have your freedom taken from you. A single bald accusation.

And yes. I have a problem with that.


So it pretty much works like America then?
 
2014-02-11 07:31:08 AM  

gfid: "That's the good thing about being president.  I can do whatever I want." - Obama

Funny I should hear him say that just as I was reading this thread.

/yes, he actually said that.
//no, he was not referring to the subject of this thread.


www.emergingmarketsillustrated.com
 
2014-02-11 07:31:13 AM  
Kill them now, let Allah sort it out later.
 
2014-02-11 07:31:19 AM  
So don't target the "citizen". Target the terrorist(s) he is standing next to. Problem solved.

Personally if he's one of those idiots making videos for Al qaeda, he should be considered a citizen of the US.
 
2014-02-11 07:31:37 AM  

GoldSpider: lohphat: Ask Rodney King.


wut?


he meant Chris Dorner and all the people in trucks the LAPD shot up.
 
2014-02-11 07:31:38 AM  

ReverendJasen: lohphat: Ask Rodney King.

Dorner, anyone?  That was an unabashed, unapologetic assassination.  There were never any orders to capture him, it was "shoot to kill."


That was done purely for his safety.
 
2014-02-11 07:31:51 AM  

GoldSpider: irate vegetable: Is it a violation when the police shoot a suspect without trial?

The police coordinate raids with the intention of executing suspects?


Do you think the administration would be coordinating drone strikes if they were capable of detaining the suspects in question?  If they were in Europe, or not a tribal backwater with no real police force, they wouldn't.


they might kill white people with drone strikes in Europe
 
2014-02-11 07:32:18 AM  
Meh, you were warned.
 
2014-02-11 07:32:19 AM  

GoldSpider: TuteTibiImperes: If you're located within the borders of the US you're entitled to due process of law.  If you're operating as part of a terrorist network overseas, it shouldn't matter if you're a citizen of the US, Afghanistan, or Pakistan, the same rules don't apply over there as they do here.

In addition to due process, what other rights do American citizens surrender when they travel abroad?



You do surrender your rights to due process. Ask those sailors that were convicted of raping a girl in Okinawa 2 years ago. First thing they did was run screaming for the MPs to take them into custody. Military washed their hands of them and now they're in a Japanese prison.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/03/01/us-navy-sailors -o kinawa-rape/1955873/

Essentially, if you go to another country and commit criminal acts, don't pretend that saying "I want to go to the U.S. for my punishment" is going to save you.
 
2014-02-11 07:33:13 AM  
So, where is all the outrage with Mr. Rule of Law?  Oh, that's right, he's a wiberal, he knows what's best for the country.  Remember this when a Republican takes over.
 
2014-02-11 07:33:15 AM  

ReverendJasen: You do, when you decide to move to Yemen and live in an al Qaeda cell.
What, do you think the military would just start targeting American tourists in foreign countries for the hell of it?


Remember that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' bit? Without that particular test being met, that's precisely what this sounds like to me. And, that should frighten you, IMO.
 
2014-02-11 07:34:05 AM  

gfid: "That's the good thing about being president.  I can do whatever I want." - Obama


that's what he says when he snags Malia's toaster strudel on the way by the breakfast table in the morning.
 
2014-02-11 07:36:32 AM  
Dedmon:
It actually does. What do you think "due process of law" means, anyway? It's never so simple as a one line quote. What the president is doing is within the powers of his office, powers that were allocated by the constitution and by various acts of congress over the centuries. The war powers of the president should be more limited,I agree. However, the "due process" doesn't have to be a court, by law. It could be any "due process" as interpreted by the POTUS and SCOTUS, and thus far, it's been deemed appropriate to use intelligence agencies to locate and eliminate any person duly determined to be at war with America or our allies.

TLDR: The due process is the president getting together with the intelligence agencies, looking over the evidence, and determining if another human should die on the other side of the world, all within the law.


Yes, that is what some folks in the government have decided. I (and many Americans) believe they are wrong, and these decisions are dangerous. We shouldn't all pretend like these sorts of powers aren't open to abuse and mistakes. In the latter case, how often do you think they might err on the side of "safety" and kill people who they really aren't sure are in fact terrorists? Hell, just the other day we had a story of a woman mistakenly placed on the no fly list and her hell of trying to get off. We also know that a number of completely innocent people were "extraordinarily rendered" to Middle Eastern regimes in order to endure horrific torture. Oops, our bad. Similarly, a lot of folks who ended up at Guantanamo were just poor suckers caught in the wrong place at teh wrong time. Do we really believe that such mistakes never happen with folks on the "kill" lists? Life isn't a movie where everything is always neat and obvious. In addition, how often might they kill people who are "fellow travelers" of the terrorists but are themselves not violent and might not even advocate violence? Finally, do we really think a president would never, even in the future, abuse such unchecked power?

If we are now going to be in the business of regularly assassinating folks, we should come up with a proper due process, not this ad hoc one. I'm not a big fan of secret courts, but maybe that will have to be the way to go. It wouldn't be perfect, but at least there might be a properly independent institutional check on the executive branch.
 
Displayed 50 of 404 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report